Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "seiya".
Did you mean:
seeya
2019 May 23
3
Proposal for Mach-O support in llvm-objcopy: section renaming
> On May 23, 2019, at 2:05 AM, James Henderson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> I discussed this with Seiya off the mailing list yesterday, and this was the suggestion we came up with, on the basis that GNU objcopy has support for the renaming for GDB support, but it might be confusing to people who are new to the system, so we provide a more expected output option. I'm not experienced with MachO at...
2019 May 23
2
Proposal for Mach-O support in llvm-objcopy: section renaming
...a.out
OK: llvm-objcopy --only-secton=.text a.out a.out2
WRONG: llvm-objcopy --macho-names --only-secton=.text a.out
WRONG: llvm-objcopy --macho-names --only-secton=__TEXT.__text a.out
OK: llvm-objcopy --macho-names --only-secton=__TEXT,__text a.out
What do you think about this behavior?
Thanks,
Seiya
[1]: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=bfd/mach-o.c;h=d9edef2871d83b53280b613935c068e4327f3270;hb=HEAD#l364
[2]: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=bfd/mach-o.c;h=d9edef2871d83b53280b613935c068e4327f3270;hb=HEAD#l90
2019 Mar 26
2
GSoC19: Improve LLVM binary utilities
Hi all,
My name is Seiya Nuta. I'm studying for my master's degree in University
of Tsukuba and interested in the project named "Improve LLVM binary
utilities". I've skimmed through llvm-objcopy/llvm-objdump, commit logs,
and Bugzilla to figure out what should I do.
I have some questions about the pr...
2019 Mar 26
4
GSoC19: Improve LLVM binary utilities
(Adding just a bit to Jake's response)
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 11:31 AM Jake Ehrlich via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi Seiya,
>
> What should I prioritize? I suppose that improving llvm-objcopy is the
>> most crucial work in this summer.
>
>
> This is an opinion that will vary a lot from person to person.
>
+1! And don't forget that one of those people is you -- I don't think it
would be u...
2019 May 10
2
contributing llvm-lipo
Every case is different,
but yes, as I said - I would like to take a closer look at the problem
again,
it might be the case that we don't need this complexity in this particular
case,
but want to double check.
But yeah, in general I agree with you!
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 6:09 PM Jake Ehrlich <jakehehrlich at google.com> wrote:
> I think that pretty much hits the nail on the head.